Can we be accused of doing something another VPN user did?

[greenclaydog 6]

So, if someone did something extremely illegal and they went back to the VPN IP address, could they potentially bust down the doors of every user connected to that particular server?

 

It would be pretty worrisome to think that another users actions could get peoples homes broken into and shoved into cop cars and questioning, computer confiscation etc. because one asshole did something and now everyone on that server could be suspect.

 

Not to mention that those people could be forced to hand over passwords and such even though they did nothing wrong.

 

Should we be worried about this?

[victorab 12]

So, if someone did something extremely illegal and they went back to the VPN IP address, could they potentially bust down the doors of every user connected to that particular server?

 

It would be pretty worrisome to think that another users actions could get peoples homes broken into and shoved into cop cars and questioning, computer confiscation etc. because one asshole did something and now everyone on that server could be suspect.

 

Not to mention that those people could be forced to hand over passwords and such even though they did nothing wrong.

 

Should we be worried about this?

You probably know that there is multiple countries in the world, with multiple jurisdictions. If you live in Syria, maybe. In switzerland, no. So, for what jurisdiction?

[greenclaydog 6]

 

So, if someone did something extremely illegal and they went back to the VPN IP address, could they potentially bust down the doors of every user connected to that particular server?

 

It would be pretty worrisome to think that another users actions could get peoples homes broken into and shoved into cop cars and questioning, computer confiscation etc. because one asshole did something and now everyone on that server could be suspect.

 

Not to mention that those people could be forced to hand over passwords and such even though they did nothing wrong.

 

Should we be worried about this?

You probably know that there is multiple countries in the world, with multiple jurisdictions. If you live in Syria, maybe. In switzerland, no. So, for what jurisdiction?

I suppose my question pertains to those of us living in the US and UK.

[victorab 12]

I suppose my question pertains to those of us living in the US and UK.

 

 

Us: No

4th amendment of the Consitution protect citizens of arbitrary perquisitions. Police officers need a Search Warrant provided by a prosecutor with proofs. And the only fact that you are connected to a server used by criminals is definitely not a viable proof.

 

UK: No

The Police and Criminal Evidence Act also protect citizens. police need the approval of a local magistrate. 

 

In every country where a judge approval is needed for a perquisitions, you are safe from this bullshit.

[greenclaydog 6]

 

I suppose my question pertains to those of us living in the US and UK.

 

 

Us: No

4th amendment of the Consitution protect citizens of arbitrary perquisitions. Police officers need a Search Warrant provided by a prosecutor with proofs. And the only fact that you are connected to a server used by criminals is definitely not a viable proof.

 

UK: No

The Police and Criminal Evidence Act also protect citizens. police need the approval of a local magistrate. 

 

In every country where a judge approval is needed for a perquisitions, you are safe from this bullshit.

 

With all the information coming out about government activities, would situations like this really be out of the realm of possibility?

[victorab 12]

 

 

I suppose my question pertains to those of us living in the US and UK.

 

 

Us: No

4th amendment of the Consitution protect citizens of arbitrary perquisitions. Police officers need a Search Warrant provided by a prosecutor with proofs. And the only fact that you are connected to a server used by criminals is definitely not a viable proof.

 

UK: No

The Police and Criminal Evidence Act also protect citizens. police need the approval of a local magistrate. 

 

In every country where a judge approval is needed for a perquisitions, you are safe from this bullshit.

 

With all the information coming out about government activities, would situations like this really be out of the realm of possibility?

Definitely. 

What if someone sent child porn via Gmail, do you think every Gmail users will/can have their doors breaked? 

They can do it in France because of the emergency state, but not in normal situations. 

[NaDre 157]

Keep in mind that AirVPN, like any other VPN provider would obey (to the extent required by law, and given what information they actually have to provide) a valid court order for their jurisdiction. To expect otherwise would be naive. So such extreme measures would not be needed.

 

Keep in mind also that AirVPN does have terms of service:

 

https://airvpn.org/tos/

 

Quoting: " 1. use the Service to violate, in any way, directly or indirectly, the European Convention for Human Rights"
 

So if the offense was onerous enough, AirVPN would probably co-operate, not just minimally meet legal obligations.

 

Folks should not have unrealistic expectations.

[Weasel 16]

Well how can AIRVPN cooperate with the law if they delete everything about you within 1 minute of you disconnecting from their servers, according to them?  If they are willing to cooperate then they must have paperwork on you, no?  So if user X went to site ABC and then logged off, and the next day the law shows up and says give us all the information you have on user X for yesterday because he went to ABC or whatever, shouldn't they say "sorry Mr. law, we don't have jack on user X".  Also shouldn't all the data be encrypted via 256bit so they can't see it?  Does using SSL prevent them from seeing it?

[OpenSourcerer 1442]

So if user X went to site ABC and then logged off, and the next day the law shows up and says give us all the information you have on user X for yesterday because he went to ABC or whatever, shouldn't they say "sorry Mr. law, we don't have jack on user X".

 

That would be rude and mark AirVPN an uncooperative piece of shit or something. Better say "Sure, here's what we have. Regards". You plug the hard drive in and find that it's empty. Surpriiise!

[NaDre 157]

The question of when and how AirVPN would go about enforcing its Terms of Service has come up a few times in this forum, For example:

 

https://airvpn.org/topic/7181-clarification-of-your-monitoring-policies/?p=29972

 

https://airvpn.org/topic/8099-how-would-you-handle-abuse-complaint/?p=8117

[Weasel 16]

It should also be noted that any person or company that states a term of service knowing that term of service to be false is liable for fraud.  Thus if a VPN states they keep no logs, and it is later found out they do, they have committed a fraud and no disclaimer can protect them from the fraud, they must knowingly have clean hands in the matter to be protected by the disclaimer.

 

Thus to the OP question, if Mr. Law came calling and AIRVPN had evidence to hand over to them that would violate the terms of service, that being "we keep no logs".  Now if they keep something other than a log that would provide the information to Mr. Law that may or may not be covered under the TOS, but AIRVPN does not divulge how they know when we are connected, how much bandwidth we use etc etc.

 

So that guy who got caught in the UK could have, and should have, sued that VPN company for breach of trust (NO LOGS).